Why does everyone call games like Grand Theft Auto 'sandbox' games? It doesn't make much sense, especially when there are other games that are much more like sandboxes. Viva Pinata is a great example of a real sandbox game. You start off with an empty lot, you are given a shovel, and you do what you want. It doesn't get any more 'sandboxy' than that. Sim City is another good example of a sandbox game. You start off with nothing, and you slowly create a living and working civilization. Everything is in your control, with you as the master designer - the kid in the sandbox holding a plastic shovel.

I don't know how games like GTA and Crackdown were given such a label, or who was the genius that came up with it, but theses games are not sandbox games. They are open world games, and the specific genre should be applied afterwards. For example, Grand Theft Auto: San Andrea is an open world action/adventure game. Sure, you can create your own fun in Crackdown by piling up a bunch of cars and then firing a rocket into the heap, resulting in a mess of car parts going in every direction, but just because you can do something that the game does not specifically tell you to do, it doesn't mean it should be considered a sandbox.

It's not like you can take down the buildings in Liberty City and construct your own, or rip out a bunch of roads and put in a park. These games have specific story missions, but also allow you to play around with the environment, either through side missions, or by giving you the freedom to create your own fun. However, everything is done within a predetermined environment that cannot be changed. That's no sandbox game; you are just opting to not do any missions at the moment.

Are loud mouthed developers good for the industry? I don't know why, but it feels like many developers have become very outspoken lately. Take David Jaffe, for example. The lead designer of God of War has become popular for the hit game, but has become famous for is mouth. Do we pay attention to him because he made a great game, or because he has interesting things to say? I find it funny how we have paid so much attention to his latest game, Calling All Cars, which is a $10 arcade game for the Playstation Network. Downloadable games have been released on the PS3, Wii, and Xbox 360 on a weekly basis, and Calling All Cars is the only game among them that has received so much press coverage. Don't get me wrong; I want developers to be acknowledged for their hard work, and games should be hyped based on the developers, not on the IP, the same way movies are hyped based on their directors, but if it's just a standard action arcade game, there is no reason to have stories on it every other day.

Jaffe's most recent mouth-off concerned early reviews for Calling All Cars. He has a right to comment on reviews for his own game, as long as he recognizes that there always will be a bias simply because he created it. As a game player, I will also disagree with some reviews, but that's the way every medium works. He can complain and nag all he wants, but he should not expect them to change the reviews scores just because he made the game and has come up with a valid counterpoint to any given review.

Denis Dyack, the lead designer on Too Human and Eternal Darkness, is another developer who has been giving his two cents to various media outlets. However, he has a whole different argument. He wants game previews to no longer exist, because too many people make final judgments based on unfinished builds of games. This makes sense on paper. After all, the movie industry works in this way, where only teasers are released while the movie is in production, but the full marketing push is made after the move is completed. However, in order for it to work in the game industry, game journalism would have to change dramatically, and I doubt anyone is willing to make these changes, at least for now.

Is it good for developers to speak out, or does it lead to a negative effect on their respective game? I don't think it makes a difference. When a famous actor opens up his or her loud mouth about something, everyone in the world hears about it. Look what happened to Alec Baldwin or Don Imus, just to name a couple of situations that came up in the past month. If a developer speaks out, nobody hears about it, and if anybody does, is has little impact on the game's status.

I'm sure most of you have already seen the trailer for Grand Theft Auto IV, and if you're like me, you've probably seen it even more. I'm very happy the series has returned to Liberty City. Unlike GTAIII, though, this Liberty City looks exactly like New York City. I mean the similarities are everywhere, and as a person who has been going into the city almost every day for work, I think it's awesome. I wonder how accurate they'll make the streets. As a New Yorker, this trailer was all I needed.

However, I know everyone wants to know how the gameplay will change. The GTA series has pretty much defined the last generation, and we all got pretty tired of it by the end. Now we want something that will reinvigorate it. Will there be multiplayer? Will the controls be refined? Will the gameplay change at all? We have just as many questions as we did before seeing the trailer. This was obviously done to create awareness for the game, and Rockstar now has everyone on a leash. No matter how much you like them or hate them, I bet you will click on every news story that involves GTA IV. All I can say for now is that it is nice to be back in Liberty City, especially since it looks exactly like my home, New York City.

As a final note, I got my Xbox 360 back last week, and to my dismay, it was not properly fixed. Now when I turn it on, the screen remains black. After a few seconds, if I turn it off and power it back on, it will boot up properly and I can game on. However, I have to do that every time I go to turn on my console. What gives? I looked it up, and it turns out to be an A/V problem. I tested my cables, and they work fine. So the problem seems to lie within the way the console it outputting the signal, not the cable.

Nintendo have done an amazing job with the DS and Wii. It was only a couple of years ago that there were rumors of Nintendo getting out of the console market, being bought out by another company (Microsoft), or just becoming anther Sega, where they would just focus on creating software. With the DS doing incredibly well, and the Wii coming out of the gates at amazing speeds, some analysts are predicting Nintendo to be second place in the console wars, with a couple being bold enough to say Nintendo will be number one for the first time in over a decade.
I like the Wii, but I do not like the software. Sure, we all thought Zelda was great, but we have to get past that. It was originally designed to be a GameCube game, and Nintendo simply used it to help drive attention to the Wii. Here we stand a couple of months after its release and I can honestly say that the software is pretty bland. The games consist of either mini game compilations, or ports of games that have come out on Playstation 2 or Xbox 360. Even the first party games are compilations (WarioWare, Wii Play, Wii Sports, Mario Party 8 ) or ports (Zelda). The worst part about all of this is the third parties that continuously announce another game that will be ported over to the Wii. Here is a quick rundown, right off the top of my head: Scarface, Godfather, Mortal Kombat, Prince of Persia (PSP port), and Blazing Angels. When these games were announced, the press releases would always make sure to mention that their respective game will "take advantage of the unique capabilities of the Wii".
This is quickly becoming the weak point for the Wii. All we have to do is look at how the PSP turned out. The PSP has been getting a whole bunch of ported games form the PS2, and now the trend seems to be moving toward making remakes of Final Fantasy, but I digress. The problem with these Wii ports is that the games have already been designed, coded, and shipped. All they are doing is using the same game and forcing some control scheme that works with the Wii remote and nunchuk. Then, if that doesn't work for you, you can always use the forbidden funny how they always throw in that line at the very end, just for some assurance that the game will definitely work, in one way or another.
With the PS2's huge installed base, publishers are not hesitating in developing games for it, and simply making a port that runs on Wii. There is very little risk involved, mainly because it is much cheaper than developing for Xbox 360 and Playstation 3. It seems like everyone is jumping on the Wii bandwagon, but how long can it last? Will these graphics hold up for much longer? What if all of these Wii ports result in poor quality and negative feedback from those who are buying these games? Will Nintendo step in and once again have to monitor all of the software, the same way they did way back for the NES and SNES? Who knows? Maybe I'm being too cynical on the whole thing.
However, I am still looking for the games that really show me what is so special about the Wii. Games like Wii Sports and Wario Ware just give you an idea of how well the hardware can read your movement, but I want that game that takes it all and puts it into something more full and complete. There are a few games that I'm looking forward to, but just a few. It'll be interesting to see how all this pans out.

So 2006 is coming to a close real fast, and before we say goodbye, I would like to take one last look back at some of the best games of the year. Yea, I know every other website and blog are making their end of the year lists and awards as well, but I'm going to make one just the same.
This is my list of the best and most significant games of 2006. They are listed in alphabetical order, as I see no need in ranking games that span across different genres and platforms. You simply cannot go wrong with any of these games, unless you have something against a particular genre. There was just no way I could have gotten to play through all of these games, but I did play through at least half of them. As for the others, it was a combination of reading the reviews, community reactions, market reactions, and annual award shows that a couple of websites have already concluded.
The best games of 2006 are:

* Brain Age: Train Your Brain in Minutes a Day (DS)
* Bully (PS2)
* Dead Rising (X360)
* Elite Beat Agents (DS)
* Final Fantasy XII (PS2)
* Gears of War (X360)
* The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion (X360, PC)
* Okami (PS2)
* The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (Wii, GCN)
* Viva Pinata (X360)
The Xbox 360 had the best year, but with the PS3 and Wii just launching, you can expect things to get tight next year. The PS2 also had a phenomenal year, with the GameCube and Xbox fading to black. The Nintendo DS continues to do extremely well, as the PSP struggles to find an identity. Just because a PSP game did not make the list, it does not mean there are no good games for it. Give it at least one more year.
Happy Holidays and Happy New Year.

I remember last year around this time when I wrote about how much of an improvement Spike TV's 2005 Video Game Award Show was over the previous year. However, after watching this year's award show, I have come to the conclusion that there cannot and never will be a good video game award show on TV. Why? That's a fantastic question, but I have the answer:


Hollywood.

The problem for Spike TV is that they want to generate the maximum amount of viewers. If they leave Hollywood out of the equation, you are left with an award show filled with all people from within the industry. These people know the industry, they know what it takes to make a good game, and they know the work that goes into making good games. Having these people gather for an award ceremony is very possible, as they do it every year for the AIAS awards held in February. That is the real video game award ceremony, but since Hollywood is not involved, the assumption is that nobody will watch it, and so AIAS is not filmed and not aired on television.

Meanwhile, we are left with a lame award show filled with awkward tension between the few game designers who actually attend and the B list actors and actresses who are just there for the after party. What is even worse is the fact that the best awards are not even presented. Presentations were given for the best leading male and female roles, best game based on a movie or television show, best song, best sports game, and best cast. Notice how all of these awards highlight Hollywood talent or professional sport. The games that these actors and actresses are attached to would be C classed games like Scarface, Godfather, Family Guy, and The Sopranos game, which is below a C. What about the other awards that dealt with the much better games? Halfway through the show, right before a commercial break, the announcer quickly runs down the winners of other, more important awards like the best shooter, best RPG, best action game, and a few others. They didn't present these awards because game designers would have to get on stage and give their thanks, and since actors and actresses are not involved, who wants to watch any of that? Hollwood is fun, not the other guys.

Just when it could not be any more disrespectful to the real good games of 2006, it does. Elder Scroll IV: Oblivion won for the game of the year, and I'm totally fine with that. However, when it was announced, the cheers were low and sounded forced. Either people in the crowd did not know what Elder Scrolls is or they were rooting for Gears of War because it was the most mainstream game of the nominees. Three guys from Bethesda and 2K games go up to accept the award. One of them gives his thanks and then moves out of the way for the next guy to give his thanks. It immediately cuts out to Samuel L. Jackson ending the show with whatever closing statements and the credits roll.

I said good things about the show last year because it was an improvement, but it was so annoying to watch it this year. I noticed the amount of lame emanating from the show in the very first few minutes, and I only decided to stick through the entire show because the worst critics are those who would watch the first few minutes and make a judgment based only on those few minutes. I know Spike is going to do this exact thing again, so why should I even bother? It is clear that it was not designed for the hardcore gamer, and yet, they actually think they are. They used the infamous "All you base are belong to us" twice in the show. That line is pretty dead, and they were using it like it is the only way to communicate to us. Tony Hawk messed up when attempting to say it: "All you base belong are to us".

I'm done with Spike TV's award show. I do not recommend you to catch a rerun that will probably air every night into 2007, unless you want to see for yourself how awful of a show it turned out to be.

I bought the Wii this past Sunday. I had to wait in line for it, which means I got up at 5:00 in the morning and found thirty some-odd people already there. The people there were pretty boring, so I just spent most of the time listening to the 1up Yours podcast, which is a fantastic gaming podcast by the way. Two hours later, it was announced that they were getting 50 units, which brought a nice sigh of relief as I saw many people walk off the back of the line.

The store opened at 8:00 and I, of course, bought Zelda to go along with my purchase. The bad news was that they sold out of controllers, but I refused to go home without and extra controller, so I drove over to a nearby Toys R Us. It did not open yet, and there was a line of 200 people waiting outside for their Wiis. I was able to cut the entire line simply because I was not there to buy the console, and was in and out in no time.

I have had the Wii for three days now, and I still did not unwrap Zelda. No, it does not mean that Wii Sports is that good. I just don't have the time right now. Wii Sports is ok, but none of the sports are fully fleshed out games, and so I only find use in it if company ever comes over. I did create some Mii characters, but I am not happy with the way my Mii came out. I think there needs to be some more variety in the choices, especially with the facial hair. Hopefully, Nintendo will continuously update the Mii Channel, maybe even add an option to have ears or something.

I like the user interface of the Wii. The main menu looks very clean, with each channel having its own thumbnail on the dashboard. However, it has potential to get really ugly when you have many channels, and I see that every time you download a virtual console game, it takes up a space on the main menu. Huge problems lie ahead if Nintendo does not change this. The Forecast, News, and Web Browser Channels do not work yet, and I'm hoping some of this stuff is goes live by Christmas. After Zelda, there's not much else to do with the Wii.

The WiFi works fine, and I had to update a couple of things to access the Mii Shop Channel. I browsed through the virtual console titles, but I seriously do not see myself buying any of that stuff unless they give me some extra incentive to go back and play those games again. Maybe if it had something along the lines of leader boards or achievements like the 360 has. I still believe the friend code thing is stupid, but at least Nintendo is finally online. Now all we need are some games that actually go online. In case some games do make it online, my Friend Code is 2229-8065-0769-1707.

The controller ended up feeling just fine. Navigating the menus was actually fun at first, but once the initial shock value wears off, it feels natural. Wii Sports responded well with the controller, although boxing seemed to have a delay when I swung fast, and it did not match up with my hands one to one.

I bought the Wii now mainly because of Zelda. I look forward to future titles like Metroid Mario, and Smash Bros., but if third parties don't step it up, I really do believe that the Wii's library will be just as thin as the GameCube and maybe even the N64. I know the 360 will still be my main console, but the Wii can act as a nice supplement to my gaming experience. I just don't recommend that you only get a Wii.

As a side note, the Wii and Playstation 3 have finally released and the next generation is officially the current generation. I hope I can give a proper send off to the last generation consoles in another blog, but until then, let the current gen games begin!

Living in New York does not give one the opportunity of attending such gaming events as E3, PAX, CES, TGS, DICE, or GDC, which all take place on the west coast or Japan. There is a relatively new event which does take place in New York City, called Digital Life. It is an event that has been going on for three years now and it contains a fair mix of video games and other technologies such as mp3 players, cell phones, and high def media players. With each year, the gaming sections have grown more and more.

This year's Digital Life was actually ten times better than last year. The main reason is because there was a lot of playable stuff that has yet to be released, whereas last year, all the playable games were already released, and there were only video montages of 360 games. This year, the PS3 and Wii were both playable (and I will comment on them later in this post). There were also many playable games that have yet to be released, like FFXII, Splinter Cell: Double Agent, Rainbow Six: Vegas, Viva Pinata, MGS: Portable Ops, and Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin.

Forget the games, though. I want to talk about the new consoles. The PS3 was the first thing you would see when walking in. The console was exposed for everyone to see, and although it was possible to touch, you were not allowed. It's a pretty big machine, but I must admit that it is sleek. Resistance was the only playable game, and what's even worse is that there was only one station to play it on. This means you had to wait in a line that averaged at least 10 people. On top of that, each person would play until they die, and people were not playing aggressive, so each person had about 10 minutes at it before passing the controller. Totally lame. So I passed on my opportunity to hold the controller. What I can say is that it looked fine, but nothing that is capable of blowing the 360 out of the water. They also had videos of other PS3 games, which all looked good and decent, but Resistance looked the best mainly because it was real and playable, while the videos were enhanced to look good and cinematic.

The Wii has a different story. For starters, I HAD to get my hands on the controller, no matter what the game was or how long the line was. In the Konami booth, there was a main stage setup for people to make fools of themselves while playing Karaoke Revolution. While taking a glance, my eyes were quickly drawn down at someone holding a white and shiny two piece object while smiling at a screen. As I inched my way closer, I realized this is it: I finally get to play the Wii. The playable game was Elebits, which is a first person game where you are in a house and you have to look everywhere for these Pikmin-like creatures that must be caught to open up more areas to the house. The wait wasn't even too long. I guess many people didn't even realize that there was a brand new Nintendo console being shown off at the Konami booth, let alone the fact that the Karaoke Revolution stage was right being the setup and people probably wanted to distance themselves from the embarrassment.

The Wii controller felt good. The nunchuk was really light and felt hollow, while the Wiimote was denser but also maintained a light feel to it as well. The buttons felt solid, comparable to the DS Lite, but I do have to question the C button that lies on the shoulder of the nunchuk along with the Z button. Elebits didn't use any button besides the main A button on the Wiimote, so I can't make any judgments on a game that requires the use of all the buttons. As I read in many hands on previews of almost every Wii game, I had to get used to the feel and sensitivity of the controller. The crosshairs on screen moved so quickly as I tried to aim my shot. However, I realized that I didn't have to move the Wiimote that much at all. In fact, I find it hard to believe that one can get tired from playing this game because it required the slightest motion to get from one corner of the screen to the next. The tricky part after adjusting to the responsiveness is using the analog stick to walk around in conjunction with aiming the Wiimote. That took another 20 to 30 seconds of adjusting. However, by the final minute of the demo, I was walking all around, opening cabinets and tossing objects all over the screen with ease. When I opened the oven and a bunch of little critters came spilling out, I zapped them all up and pressed on. In three minutes, I went from seriously doubting this controller could work to looking forward to my next experience with the Wii. I'm not absolutely sold on the thing, but I have come to realize what the fuss is all about.

Digital Life made huge leaps compared to last year's show. There were much more playable games that gave you that satisfaction of being at an event that felt exclusive because of the fact that many of these games are not out yet. On top of that, the PS3 and Wii were there, although they both had an extremely small showing. Why did Nintendo not have their own booth to show off the Wii? I mean, they just held an event for the Wii in NYC a few weeks ago. If they want to incorporate their "grassroots" effort to get the message out there about the Wii, why not make an appearance at a show that had 50,000 attendees? I would have been really upset if I missed the Wii and later found out it was there. Playing the Wii alone made the time spent at Digital Life worth it. Besides Nintendo's no show, I do have to say Ziff Davis Media did a great job on this year's Digital Life, and I look forward to the next show.